It looks like Wellington North is being refused support from the Ministry of Transportation over relaxing rules on bridge inspections.
MTO chief engineer Gerry Chaput responded to council’s request to save money with fewer inspections with a definite “No.”
Councillors had questioned why bridges inspected and approved to be in good condition for the next 5, 10 or 15 years need more inspections every other year. Earlier this year, they noted the municipality is due to complete a two-year inspection of its bridges as well as an inspection of its culverts. Those culverts were last inspected in 2004.
Bids to redo the work came in at between $7,600 and $29,320, plus GST.
Council’s resolution stated “due to amalgamations, many municipalities are responsible for a multitude of small bridges on secondary roads with low traffic volumes.”
Further, the resolution stated, “Bridge inspection requirements place an unnecessary financial burden on small municipalities.”
Because many municipalities have adopted minimum maintenance standards to protect them from liability claims, and those standards were based on traffic counts and speed limits, Wellington North asked the MTO to consider extending the time frame for inspections from two to five years for certain bridge types.
The resolution also stated any bridge currently under load limitations would continue to be inspected every two years by a professional engineer.
At an earlier meeting, councillor Dan Yake said the bridges are in good condition.
“It seems a little bit pointless to have them inspected every two years, if they have been determined to be structurally sound for a longer period of time,” Yake said.
But Chaput disagreed.
His response was, “Ontario roadways are among the safest in North America and the legislated inspection and regular maintenance of our bridges play an integral role in sustaining our record.”
Chaput cited the tragedies created through bridge collapses in Montreal and Minnesota.
“It is recognized that while a collapse on a less travelled road has less risks of injury, its impacts could be fatal and at minimum, disadvantage property owners that rely on those bridges for local transportation, or more importantly, emergency services such as police, fire departments or ambulances.”
He said municipal efforts to preserve infrastructure are appreciated and noted the ministry has provided financial assistance through the Building Canada Fund, the Canada-Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund and Move Ontario.
“While this funding does not cover the costs of inspections, it provides some flexibility to ensure municipal priorities are addressed.”
Chaput added, “To reduce the requirements of bridge inspections would not be a responsible decision by any level of government at this time. I encourage you to make inspections a priority to provide your residents with confidence in both their bridges and their council.”
In response to the letter, Yake said, “Well, that’s the response we got from the MTO regarding the number of bridge inspections.”
Yake said, “[Chaput] certainly makes a good point.” He said council is aware of bridge collapses in Montreal and Minnesota.
“I guess all we were really asking … was that we’d heard the government was planning to eliminate some red tape for municipalities and making it easier for them to do business. We did not want to eliminate bridge inspection, but rather have a longer time between inspections to save some costs. I don’t think we are the only municipality affected by that.”
